While this document claims that no written Burushaki language exists, it is claimed that Nubchen translated the Anuyoga tantras from this language, and in fact Burushaki words do exist in the Anuyoga tantras.

But there is no relationship here with Persian.

I just watched this doc about this old tribe in Pakistan, near the Swat, the Kalash tribe (among others). These Aryan tribals were more numerous back then. I would argue, the Chinese accounts of Oddiyana, i.e., their infatuation with mantric formula, is decidedly Zoro... in influence. I see culture as spectral. In this area you have a blend of both the Proto-Aryan, Persian and Indian in the Swat and around Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgistan, etc... This whole area was under heavy historical influence by Persia, India and China... It would be difficult to pigeon-hole Swat as "culturally Indian." Then, as now, it had its distinct idiosyncrasies that made it seem a little far North of Indian.

While this document claims that no written Burushaki language exists, it is claimed that Nubchen translated the Anuyoga tantras from this language, and in fact Burushaki words do exist in the Anuyoga tantras.

But there is no relationship here with Persian.

I just watched this doc about this old tribe in Pakistan, near the Swat, the Kalash tribe (among others). These Aryan tribals were more numerous back then. I would argue, the Chinese accounts of Oddiyana, i.e., their infatuation with mantric formula, is decidedly Zoro... in influence. I see culture as spectral. In this area you have a blend of both the Proto-Aryan, Persian and Indian in the Swat and around Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgistan, etc... This whole area was under heavy historical influence by Persia, India and China... It would be difficult to pigeon-hole Swat as "culturally Indian." Then, as now, it had its distinct idiosyncrasies that made it seem a little far North of Indian.

invisiblediamond wrote: It would be difficult to pigeon-hole Swat as "culturally Indian." Then, as now, it had its distinct idiosyncrasies that made it seem a little far North of Indian.

Woo-Chang, or Udyana. Monasteries, and Their Ways. Traces of Buddha.

After crossing the river, (the travellers) immediately came to the kingdom of Woo-chang, which is indeed (a part) of North India. The people all use the language of Central India, “Central India” being what we should call the “Middle Kingdom.” The food and clothes of the common people are the same as in that Central Kingdom. The Law of Buddha is very (flourishing in Woo-chang). They call the places where the monks stay (for a time) or reside permanently Sangharamas; and of these there are in all 500, the monks being all students of the hinayana. When stranger bhikshus arrive at one of them, their wants are supplied for three days, after which they are told to find a resting-place for themselves.

invisiblediamond wrote: It would be difficult to pigeon-hole Swat as "culturally Indian." Then, as now, it had its distinct idiosyncrasies that made it seem a little far North of Indian.

Woo-Chang, or Udyana. Monasteries, and Their Ways. Traces of Buddha.

After crossing the river, (the travellers) immediately came to the kingdom of Woo-chang, which is indeed (a part) of North India. The people all use the language of Central India, “Central India” being what we should call the “Middle Kingdom.” The food and clothes of the common people are the same as in that Central Kingdom. The Law of Buddha is very (flourishing in Woo-chang). They call the places where the monks stay (for a time) or reside permanently Sangharamas; and of these there are in all 500, the monks being all students of the hinayana. When stranger bhikshus arrive at one of them, their wants are supplied for three days, after which they are told to find a resting-place for themselves.

If there is a strong influence of Z in DC, then it must be coming from further Northwest. Sounds like the Bonpo are correct, DC is coming from Persia, but they have the 18,000 wrong. It's more like 8,000 (possibly a lot less too).

invisiblediamond wrote: It would be difficult to pigeon-hole Swat as "culturally Indian." Then, as now, it had its distinct idiosyncrasies that made it seem a little far North of Indian.

Woo-Chang, or Udyana. Monasteries, and Their Ways. Traces of Buddha.

After crossing the river, (the travellers) immediately came to the kingdom of Woo-chang, which is indeed (a part) of North India. The people all use the language of Central India, “Central India” being what we should call the “Middle Kingdom.” The food and clothes of the common people are the same as in that Central Kingdom. The Law of Buddha is very (flourishing in Woo-chang). They call the places where the monks stay (for a time) or reside permanently Sangharamas; and of these there are in all 500, the monks being all students of the hinayana. When stranger bhikshus arrive at one of them, their wants are supplied for three days, after which they are told to find a resting-place for themselves.

No respectable, competent scholar thinks Zoroastrianism has a "strong" influence on Dzogchen. Dzogchen is Buddhadharma. Its origins are strictly from the Indo-Buddhist cultural sphere.

In the medium history of the Vajra Bridge (klong sde), it describes nine regions (glings) in "rGya gar" (pre-partition subcontinental India including Indo-China) eight of which are sited from the center, which is of course Vajrasana: Bangla in the east, Bhaitala in the south; Orgyen in the west; Kashmir in the north; Khams bu gLing (Kampuchea) in the south east; Zangs gling (the copper country, Visnagar in Gujarat?) in the south west. Zahor in the northwest; Kamarupa in the northeast — with Vajrasana in the center of all of these.

This text further asserts that rGya gar is the source of Dzogchen; in particular, Northwestern Orgyen.

The earliest accounts we have of Garab Dorje, in the Wheel that Ascertains the Yānas (found in the Bairo rgyud 'bum, vol. nga) records that he was born to a princess from Northwestern region of Orgyen who was a Buddhist nun.

The earliest accounts state that Mañjuśrimitra was from Shri Lanka, but studied at Nalanda (founded in the 5th century AD, and all accounts describe Mañjuśrimitra as being a scholar here). Manjushrimitra meets Garab Dorje in a place within Orgyen called Danakosha, which is held to be on the shores of the great outer ocean, which can only be the Arabian Sea, somewhere on the coast of modern Pakistan.

Shri Simha was an Indian. Despite later Nyinthig accounts that he came from "rgya nag" and the attempt of some modern authors to site him as being from Khotan, the earliest accounts we have about this master indicate that he was an Indian.

We have no real reason to doubt the historicity of these three masters, especially Shri Simha, whom Vairocana met.

Last edited by Malcolm on Tue Dec 10, 2013 7:03 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Malcolm wrote:Woo-Chang, or Udyana. Monasteries, and Their Ways. Traces of Buddha.

After crossing the river, (the travellers) immediately came to the kingdom of Woo-chang, which is indeed (a part) of North India. The people all use the language of Central India, “Central India” being what we should call the “Middle Kingdom.” The food and clothes of the common people are the same as in that Central Kingdom. The Law of Buddha is very (flourishing in Woo-chang). They call the places where the monks stay (for a time) or reside permanently Sangharamas; and of these there are in all 500, the monks being all students of the hinayana. When stranger bhikshus arrive at one of them, their wants are supplied for three days, after which they are told to find a resting-place for themselves.

No respectable, competent scholar thinks Zoroastrianism has a "strong" influence on Dzogchen. Dzogchen is Buddhadharma. Its origins are strictly from the Indo-Buddhist cultural sphere.

In the medium history of the Vajra Bridge (klong sde), it describes nine regions (glings) in "rGya gar" (pre-partition subcontinental India including Indo-China) eight of which are sited from the center, which is of course Vajrasana: Bangla in the east, Bhaitala in the south; Orgyen in the west; Kashmir in the north; Khams bu gLing (Kampuchea) in the south east; Zangs gling (the copper country, Visnagar in Gujarat?) in the south west. Zahor in the northwest; Kamarupa in the northeast — with Vajrasana in the center of all of these.

This text further asserts that rGya gar is the source of Dzogchen; in particular, Northwestern Orgyen.

The earliest accounts we have of Garab Dorje, in the Wheel that Ascertains the Yānas (found in the Bairo rgyud 'bum, vol. nga) records that he was born to a princess from Northwestern region of Orgyen who was a Buddhist nun.

The earliest accounts state that Mañjuśrimitra was from Shri Lanka, but studied at Nalanda (founded in the 5th century AD, and all accounts describe Mañjuśrimitra as being a scholar here). Manjushrimitra meets Garab Dorje in a place within Orgyen called Danakosha, which is held to be on the shores of the great outer ocean, which can only be the Arabian Sea, somewhere on the coast of modern Pakistan.

Shri Simha was an Indian. Despite later Nyinthig accounts that he came from "rgya nag" and the attempt of some modern authors to site him as being from Khotan, the earliest accounts we have about this master indicate that he was an Indian.

We have no real reason to doubt the historicity of these three masters, especially Shri Simha, whom Vairocana met.

It's a good thing I'm not reputable then. I don't believe these tall tales. I don't trust historical accounts. Many of these folks say they come from Greeks. But they don't as born out by genetic testing. They are indigenous. So accounts can't be trusted. I need to see the evidence. So there is no reason to believe these Dzogchen accounts either. From an evidentiary standpoint it's a toss up. I believe the Proto-Aryan elements are part of maghada. The PreVedics revere the elements and nature. I believe Buddha was responding to much of these ideas about colors, elements, which element consciousness comes from, etc., gods and creators, ritual purity, prophets etc., by parodying them, and making messages like the Bahiya Sutta the central one. I believe dharma does this wherever it goes. Dzogchen may very we'll be the same thing for this Persian influenced group. Based on this I'm pretty doubtful about these yanas.

Last edited by invisiblediamond on Tue Dec 10, 2013 8:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.

You do realize Pakistan was a part of India until quite recently right???

Pakistan was FULL of Hindus, who slowly left during the events of Independence.

Your comments are quite hurtful, insensitive, and most of all historically wrong.

I'm tracing my roots here. These are my people. I don't care about your political biases.

The bias is from your side, (might be because of your roots, but it still is just a bias and nothing more), and quite a strong one.Let's talk about attachment and grasping (as you suggested in that other thread ... )

invisiblediamond wrote:It's a good thing I'm not reputable then. I don't believe these tall tales. I don't trust historical accounts. Many of these folks say they come from Greeks. But they don't as born out by genetic testing. They are indigenous. So accounts can't be trusted.

Huh? Are you high? First you reject that Dzogchen is indigenous to "India". Then you claim, with no evidence at all, that it is Zoroastrian influenced on the basis of some fairly unintelligible account written in the sixties about Zoroastrian mysticism on the basis of the five elements reverting to light, which is interesting but not conclusive in any sense.

Then you reject early Tibetan accounts of the importation of Dzogchen to Tibet based on what? Your "feeling"? Your years of dedicated research on comparative religion and mastery of world history?

I believe the Proto-Aryan elements are part of maghada. The PreVedics revere the elements and nature.

You are mixing up so many periods of history, so many cultures, here it is really insane. You must be smoking some really strong weed.

There is no reason to believe that there was a teaching called "atiyoga" prior to the late 6th or 7th century. But there is every reason to accept that it was brought to Tibet by Vairocana in the late 8th.

Doctrines like "the body of light" occur rather late in the textual history of Dzogchen. If they do have Persian Influence at all, it could only be from Central Asian Manichaeans. The other possible influence is the mother tantras, specifically the śrī-vajraḍāka-nāma-mahātantrarāja.

Dzogchen may very we'll be the same thing for this Persian influenced group. Based on this I'm pretty doubtful about these yanas.

I think you smoking some Bonpo crack. Did you hang out with Geshe Chagphur recently or something?

I respect Bon, but their Dzogchen is entirely Buddhist in origin.

M

Last edited by Malcolm on Tue Dec 10, 2013 8:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Paul, with all due respect, this is a preposterous thing to for you to say. You engage in wild speculation and then claim to need to see evidence?

I'm inferring from what the evidence shows. The similarities to Persian mysticism is unmistakeable. The evidence doesn't support the theory that this stuff is Buddhist without any outside influence other than Buddhists. The PreVedic tribes even share ideas with DC. I find this to be an impeachment of the claim some dakini recited it. All these exotic DC notions come from somewhere on Earth. All one has to do is look at the records of what people in the world believed to find out who thought those ideas first, and then who thought those ideas before that. Where you have such similarity in exotic ideas in such a contained radius, it becomes clear we are looking at different stages of evolution if a train of thought which is colliding g with buddhism and then an assimilation happens. This is classic Hegelian historical dialectics. It's obvious to me anyway. I'm no trying to sell this. If you reject me, fine. But I for one do t follow so called experts over the cliff into meaningless oblivion. At least I want to know that nothing is true so that I won't follow the self deceived and self professed.

Paul, with all due respect, this is a preposterous thing to for you to say. You engage in wild speculation and then claim to need to see evidence?

I'm inferring from what the evidence shows. The similarities to Persian mysticism is unmistakeable.

First, there is no Persian Mysticism. Parsis have not lived in Iran for centuries. They mostly live in Western India. Sure, under the Shah some were invited back, but then it stopped. There are only 30 thousand Parsis in Iran, who all were invited back by the Shah.

Second, the notion of five elements of the physical body reverting to light clearly is found in oral instructions connected to the Cakrasamvara completion stage practices that are contemporary with the Dzogchen tantras that treat the same idea.

Secondly, the notion that the five element vāyus of the body have color is widespread in India Buddhist tantra and intimate instructions. So there are plenty of places where these ideas about rainbow body/body of light can be sourced in India Buddhist texts.

Third, even your presentation of the elements of Zorastrianism is dramatically wrong.

Sure, I can accept that ideas like Sukhavati and so on were influenced by Persian culture, no problem.

But Zoroastrianism and Dzogchen are incompatible. It is simply irresponsible speculation on your part to continue this way. You have no evidence, you have no proof.

I won't follow the self deceived and self professed.

You don't need to follow the self-deceived, your are doing an excellent job of deceiving yourself.

Last edited by Malcolm on Tue Dec 10, 2013 8:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.